CSNbbs

Full Version: California firm to review report that led to UAB football's elimination
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Ahhh... The sweet sound of Watts gnashing his teeth.
This news made my day. A few things:

— This quote from Smith is such corporate nonsense and lets you know where his allegiances rest: "We believe this process will create a seminal body of knowledge in the changing landscape of intercollegiate athletics."

— I really hope this new task force brings more media scrutiny to the BOT and Watts if nothing else.

— How will this report play in Montgomery?

— Would love for this report to include the perspective and projection of growth with the addition of an on-campus stadium and indoor practice facility.

— Would love for this report to include input from the the City of Birmingham and how an on-campus stadium would help trigger more improvements on Southside. I think that really cuts to the heart of the matter and how UAB can take the next step as a university.
[Image: 3roato.jpg]
(03-08-2015 12:01 PM)Agent Orange Sauce Wrote: [ -> ]This news made my day. A few things:

— This quote from Smith is such corporate nonsense and lets you know where his allegiances rest: "We believe this process will create a seminal body of knowledge in the changing landscape of intercollegiate athletics."

— I really hope this new task force brings more media scrutiny to the BOT and Watts if nothing else.

Bingo. It's obvious that Wes is in cahoots. It's also probable that Watts thumbs his nose at the entire report. The saving grace for Watts/BOT is this gives them an out to reinstate IF legislative pressure continues to intensify. That's why the effort Montgomery is most important. If we can't push legislative reform, Andy and OSKR could say it will cost UAB $100 million to not bring football back and it won't matter.
I've heard that only one task force member was against the selection of OSKR originally, wonder who that could've been?? 01-lauramac2

But I think it's safe to assume that the admin will use Schwartz previous articles to say that the process was biased. You can tell they're already heading down that path based on Jim Bakken's statement last week.
(03-08-2015 12:45 PM)hooverblazer Wrote: [ -> ]I've heard that only one task force member was against the selection of OSKR originally, wonder who that could've been?? 01-lauramac2

But I think it's safe to assume that the admin will use Schwartz previous articles to say that the process was biased. You can tell they're already heading down that path based on Jim Bakken's statement last week.

I heard that too, but one article today says the ATF was in unanimous agreement to hire OSKR.
True, but it's better to tell the truth when he's going to discount the process anyway. Then we can also show him the polling data. I'd love to hear a KScope reporter ask how he feels about 2/3 of Central Alabama thinking he's completely incompetent and unfit to lead.
(03-08-2015 12:53 PM)FNblazer Wrote: [ -> ]True, but it's better to tell the truth when he's going to discount the process anyway. Then we can also show him the polling data. I'd love to hear a KScope reporter ask how he feels about 2/3 of Central Alabama thinking he's completely incompetent and unfit to lead.

It would be 90-95%, if they had any idea of what was really going on.
If the fact that Schwartz said the Carr report was wrong means that he's "biased" then the only unbiased, acceptable firm would be someone who agrees with Carr?

The whole point of this report is that it might point out flaws in the Carr report. At this rate I guess there's no way to get an "unbiased" report
So. Do wet still think the reporter is a plant too stupid to do anything but repeat what UAB tells her?

Oh, and bump.
This is the best new I have heard on the football front in a long time! I am acquainted with the work of this firm and we could not be in better hands.

Please note the Watts has made no commitment to bring back football regardless of how this new study turns out, and I think that there is at least a 50% chance that he will not restore the program even if the new study shows conclusively that it is financial workable. However, I wouldn't want to be in his shoes if he does not. In that case I would expect the blow back he he has felt until now to be mild in comparison.
(03-08-2015 01:21 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ]So. Do we still think the reporter is a plant too stupid to do anything but repeat what UAB tells her?

That was crap from the jump. She's a reporter, if something like that is released to her she needs to report it. She's not a columnist, her job is reporting the news straight.

I've seen her at entirely too many #freeUAB events to think that she's just there because the UAB administration is using her to pump their slant. Is she still young, maybe a little green and not quite as cynical as she'll become? Maybe. I don't know how old she is, how long she's been in the business. That said, if covering this mess does not teach her to question both the words of the powerful and the opinions and assumptions of those involved on both sides she's much dumber than I believe her to be.

This board does not need a gym. It gets tons of exercise from jumping to conclusions.
(03-08-2015 12:37 PM)FNblazer Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-08-2015 12:01 PM)Agent Orange Sauce Wrote: [ -> ]This news made my day. A few things:

— This quote from Smith is such corporate nonsense and lets you know where his allegiances rest: "We believe this process will create a seminal body of knowledge in the changing landscape of intercollegiate athletics."

— I really hope this new task force brings more media scrutiny to the BOT and Watts if nothing else.

Bingo. It's obvious that Wes is in cahoots. It's also probable that Watts thumbs his nose at the entire report. The saving grace for Watts/BOT is this gives them an out to reinstate IF legislative pressure continues to intensify. That's why the effort Montgomery is most important. If we can't push legislative reform, Andy and OSKR could say it will cost UAB $100 million to not bring football back and it won't matter.

Wes may be a mole but his quote is accurate. OSKR is going to look deeper into this issue than anyone else and it could have ramifications every where. It's going beyond the accounting into the economic impact on the school. True RW could just put his report in the shredder and move on but he would then be the object of a full scale revolt.
Keep in mind the timing of the report. It is supposedly due on April 2nd, so the public will get the report within a couple of days of that. Watts will probably wait a couple of weeks for his "decision". Guess what - the semester could be over and the long Summer lull could be what Watts and the BOT are counting on...
Graduation ceremonies will be held on April 25.
And this time the students will know he's up there even if he's at a table on the end hiding behind a plant.
(03-08-2015 03:51 PM)the_blazerman Wrote: [ -> ]Graduation ceremonies will be held on April 25.

Yep... Point is, if his "decision" is not public by then...
(03-08-2015 12:45 PM)hooverblazer Wrote: [ -> ]I've heard that only one task force member was against the selection of OSKR originally, wonder who that could've been?? 01-lauramac2

But I think it's safe to assume that the admin will use Schwartz previous articles to say that the process was biased. You can tell they're already heading down that path based on Jim Bakken's statement last week.

That was my thinking too... this will be their out and say that OSKR Was biased in favor and will not reinstate the programs.
Pages: 1 2 3
Reference URL's